2004 Legislative Newsletter
Greetings from Olympia--Session nearly over! Birds Eye View (BEV) keeps Washington’s 25 Audubon
chapters and 22,000 members informed about legislation effecting birds, other wildlife and their habitat.
Subscribe today and you’ll receive every issues of BEV throughout the Legislative Session.
The Legislature is for the
Birds!
Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2650,
or "the Bird Bill" as it has come to be
known, is almost on its way to the
Governor's desk! SHB 2650,
Recognizing Important Bird Areas
(IBAs), provides a statewide, science-
based means recognizing IBAs. By
identifying IBAs and working locally to
manage these areas, we can help restore
bird habitat and populations.
By the time you read this, we anticipate
that the House will have held its
"concurrence vote" (see Legislature
101) on ESHB 2650 and the Bird Bill
will fly across campus and await the
Governor's signature.
On Tuesday, March 2, 2004 the Senate
passed ESHB 2650 by a 48-0 vote.
Thank you senators Oke and
Jacobsen for moving this bill along.
This followed a unanimous vote in the
Senate Parks, Fish and Wildlife
committee the preceding Tuesday.
Previously, we worked with
Representatives Rockefeller (D-23-
Kitsap Co.), Sump (7-Ferry & Stevens
Counties), Schoesler (9-Adams &
Whitman Co.) and others to improve
the bill in a variety of ways. For
example, we developed language to
ensure that qualified and trained bird
experts and scientists collect credible,
scientifically sound IBA data. These
improvements ensured a unanimous
vote from the House. Special thanks to
Representatives Schoesler and Sump!
Watch for the next issue of BEV for a
full analysis and next steps to implement
the IBA bill.
Call your legislators today and
thank them for supporting
ESHB 2650!
Legislature 101
Conference or Concurrence;
A bill's last hurdle to the
Governor's desk
Identical "companion bills" are often
introduced in each chamber of the
legislature. This ensures the bills
sponsors' two opportunities to keep
their issue alive and moving through
the session; it also means double the
work!
The legislative system, wisely
designed to encourage a public
discourse about bills, provides
legislators, citizens, agencies and
special interest groups with
opportunities to voice their
perspectives about proposed
legislation.
At many points throughout the
legislative process a bill can be…
Continued on page 2
Issue 4—March 5, 2004
Flocking together:
By Debbi Edelstein, Executive
Director
Audubon Washington
The Board of Natural Resources (BNR)
is faced with applying a 19th century
solution to a 21st century problem. BNR
is poised to make a decision in June on
how much timber to cut over the next
ten years on our state forestlands.
Unfortunately, local governments and
schools that rely heavily on timber
revenues from state lands pressure BNR
to increase revenues, while other
citizens believe Washington needs to
find another way to pay for schools and
local governments rather than cutting
our forests.
Not surprisingly, yesterday’s solution
doesn’t completely work. Unfortunately,
the board’s response is to try to look
good today – never mind tomorrow’s
consequences.
When Washington became a state in
1889, it decided to help fund school
construction and many county services
by logging forests owned by the public.
That seemed like a good idea when our
population was around 80,000 and our
forests seemed endless.
For many years, Washington’s small
number of residents allowed the
Department of Natural Resources to
fulfill both parts of its inherently
conflicted mission: make money by
 Audubon Washington’s
Birds Eye View
Flocking together cont'd.
harvesting forests AND practice good
stewardship of those same forests.
But by 1950 when our population had
reached nearly two and a half million,
the pressure was starting to strain
Washington’s prolific timber resource.
As our population continued to expand,
so did logging, and residents began to
express concern about the stewardship
side of DNR’s responsibility.
By 2000, Washington’s population
reached six million people with
projected increases to eight million by
2025 and 12 million by 2050. This
means adding 29 more cities the size of
Spokane or Tacoma!
Clearly, schools and county services
will not be able to be funded by logging
alone – not if those forests are also
going to provide wildlife habitat,
recreation opportunities, and ecological
values such as giving us a clean and
consistent water supply. Clearly, a long-
term solution must include additional
means of raising revenue.
The Board of Natural Resources should
apply 21st century methods to achieve
sustainable harvests and improve forest
health, protect wildlife and clean water,
and safeguard the wonderful natural
places where we residents fish, hike and
camp.
The sad truth is that the board is poised
to do otherwise.
Despite public criticism and concern by
state 100s of citizens and from agency
professionals, the board asked for a
Final Environmental Impact Statement
on their preferred alternative that would
Issue 4—March 5, 2004
perpetuate poor logging practices of the
past by:
• Increasing logging next to streams,
thus reducing riparian habitat
critical for birds and shade critical
for salmon
• Reducing the number of trees left in
clear cuts
• Cutting some old growth
• Increasing logging on potentially
unstable slopes
• Measuring financial performance in
a way that provides immediate
benefits to the present and pushes
the costs to the future generations.
In public testimony, Audubon’s Science
Director Tim Cullinan cautioned that the
board is creating unrealistic expectations
of immediate income. “They’re
promising increased cut levels when
they haven’t yet resolved issues dealing
with marbled murrelets, spotted owls
and other endangered species,” he said.
Clearly the 19th century solution needs
intense scrutiny now so DNR can meet
sustainable harvesting goals while
improving our forests’ health. We must
begin the discussion now about how to
create a long-term answer to funding
human services and schools while
safeguarding the natural environment
that sustains all life.
Legislature 101 cont'd.
amended, for example with every vote
within a committee or full chamber a
bill can be amended. Bills can also be
killed at these same points. If a set of
companion bills make it through the
entire legislative cycle (voted out of the
house of origin and then passed
successfully through the opposite
chamber) it is unlikely that the bills will
still look the same. Likewise, a single
Page 2 of 10
bill that passes one chamber will often
look different once it makes it through
the other chamber.
When a bill passes with different
language than was sent by the chamber
of origin, these differences have to be
reconciled before the bill can go the
Governor. This reconciliation is done in
one of two ways depending on the
severity of their differences, by
conference committee or by
concurrence.
If the differences are simple, and the
original intent of the bill is intact, then
the latest version of the bill can be
accepted by the chamber of origin
through a simple "concurrence vote" in
which the chamber of origin looks at
those minor changes and essentially says
"okay, this is still the legislation that we
intended to pass."
If the differences are complicated, then a
conference committee is established.
The conferees work out the differences
in language and, settle on final language
that they deem appropriate. Both
chambers then agree to the language
proposed by the conference committee
and the bill passes on to the Governor.
Throughout this issue, we refer to House
and Senate Operating and Capitol
Budgets which are dealt with similarly.
Conferees from each house will soon
meet to hash through the differences in
each budget bill until a final
compromise is settled on. The process
is analogous to the negotiations between
the buyers and sellers of a house. The
conferees also decide which budget
(House or Senate) to use as the vehicle
for the final budget. The selected bill is
then voted on in the appropriate
chamber and then sent to the governor.
 Audubon Washington’s
Birds Eye View
Environmental Community
Priorities Update
Last fall the environmental community,
including Audubon Washington,
established community-wide legislative
priorities for 2004. Although we've
supported each of these priorities,
Audubon Washington and the
Washington State Audubon
Conservation Committee selected
Sustainable State Forests as one of
Audubon's own 2004 legislative
priorities because of the direct impacts
to habitat for birds and other wildlife.
Audubon Washington's policy staff and
chapters have been strongly advocating
for sustainable forests this session.
Below is an update on this and the other
environmental community priorities.
Sustainable State Forests
Washington State Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) manages over
5 million acres of public lands owned by
the citizens of Washington. Most of this
is state trust land -- forests managed to
meet about 10% of public schools and
universities' capital funding needs
(building construction, infrastructure,
etc.). A growing demand for capital
funds, complicated by low timber prices
and a weak economy, has DNR
considering an increase in harvest levels
and a weakening of habitat protections
to increase revenues.
In November 2003, DNR proposed
several alternative cut levels -- some
would double the current harvest rate.
Most alternatives are short-term
solutions to address immediate cash
flow needs but fail to address the long-
term problem of sustaining and
managing the public trust for the
beneficiaries, a healthy timber industry,
Issue 4—March 5, 2004
wildlife, habitat and open spaces for the
citizens of Washington.
The Forest Sustainability Council
(FSC), an international third-party
certifier of "sustainable forestry"
contends that Washington State public
forests can easily receive the FSC
"sustainable forestry certification" with
only a few modest improvements to its
current forest management practices.
FSC certification would establish
Washington State as a leader in
sustainable forestry, and provide
certified lumber for a growing niche
market for high-valued lumber.
Substitute House Bill 2753, legislation
requiring a feasibility study for third-
party certification of "sustainable
forestry" for our state forests passed the
House and is currently being considered
by the Senate. Although the bill was
significantly weakened when it passed
the Senate Natural Resources, Energy &
Water Committee, State Senator Regala
(D-Tacoma) has proposed a floor-
amendment that will restore the house
provisions of the bill. If enacted into
law, this legislation will direct the state
to determine the benefits and costs of
managing "sustainable certified " state
forests.
Sustainable Harvest
Calculation
Much to the environmental community's
dismay, the Board of Natural Resources
authorized Department of Natural
Resources staff to move forward with a
final environmental impact statement
(FEIS) on the Board's "preferred
alternative principals" which includes
measures to log 35% more of our state
forests, cut some of the remaining old
growth forests, and increase clear cuts
near riparian areas. "This is not good
Page 3 of 10
news for birds and wildlife" said Tim
Cullinan, Audubon Washington Science
Director, "spotted owls, marbles
murrletes, woodpeckers and other birds
and wildlife are going to be impacted
significantly." (For more information,
see the Executive Director's column on
page 1.)
PBT funding
WashPIRG, WA Toxics Coalition,
People for Puget Sound, Washington
Physicians for Social Responsibility and
others are advocating to restore funding
for the Department of Ecology's
program to stop persistent bio-
cumulative toxins. The program reduces
levels of toxins such as mercury, lead
and dioxins released into the
environment, and cleans up areas
already polluted by these and other
chemicals.
We are pleased that House operating
budget bill includes $436,000 for this
program. Proponents are pleased.
Meanwhile, the Senate operating budget
has a limited amount of money for
mercury reduction activities, "but the
scope of this funding is minimal
compared to what needs to be done to
protect our water, fish and wildlife" said
Ivy Sager-Rosenthal, Lobbyist for
WashPIRG. The Senate and House
have yet to budgetary differences. "The
Environmental Community is optimistic
that the House will work hard to ensure
the full funding for this program is
included in the final budget," said Ivy.
Contact your State Senator and ask
them to fully fund the Toxics
Program at Ecology!
 Audubon Washington’s
Birds Eye View
Priorities Cont'd.
Efficient and Renewable
Energy
Substitute House Bill 2333, promoting
increased energy efficiency and
renewable energy, earned bipartisan
approval from the House Technology,
Telecommunications and Energy
Committee. It moved successfully
through Appropriations, putting the
measure in line for a vote by the full
House.
Unfortunately, time ran out. The bill's
primary public-interest advocates were
still negotiating compromise language
with utilities and other stakeholders
when the bill died on the Feb. 17 policy
bill cut-off date.
This legislation would have made
electric utilities in Washington produce
modest percentages of their energy load
from non-hydroelectric renewable
energy sources including wind, solar,
biomass. It would also have increased
energy efficiency programs.
"We're pleased that the bill moved out
of two committees this year" said Robert
Pregalman, Executive Director, of
WashPIRG the bill, first introduced in
2003, "moved further this year than it
ever has before. We will continue to
work on a compromise that all sides of
this issue can agree to."
The downside is that Washingtonians
missed another golden opportunity to
create family-wage jobs, provide new
farm income, through wind power and
stoke the fires of economic recovery,
particularly in rural communities.
Issue 4—March 5, 2004
On a related note we support SSBs
6131 & 6132. The two bills, offered
up by Senator Morton (R-7 -
Ferry, Lincoln & Stevens Co.)
provide incentives to manufacture
solar equipment in Washington
coupled with production incentives
will ensure industry growth, leading
to local job creation and rural
economic development.
Washington is home to several solar
electric corporate leaders. The State
will lose out on significant economic
opportunities in the domestic and
global markets if solar electric
corporations continue to leave.
Incentives to encourage in-state
manufacturing and further develop
Washington’s solar electric market
will keep these businesses in state.
A big thank you to Senator Morton
for leading the way to create solar
panel manufacturing jobs in our
state.
Protecting water in streams:
The community supported legislation to
determine how much water is needed in
rivers and streams for fish and wildlife,
and create programs to ensure that these
flows are set and met within the next ten
years. "This bill is not likely to move
forward, because water users, like the
agricultural community, are opposed to
doing this within reasonable timelines"
said Craig Engelking, Sierra Club
Lobbyist. The environmental
community will continue to work on this
issue in future years.
Page 4 of 10
No Rollbacks!
The environmental community has
taken a strong position on any bills that
have the potential to undermine critical
environmental protections designed to
protect our neighborhoods and
environments.
Each year there are multiple attacks on
the Growth Management Act (GMA).
Generally some industries and
jurisdictions believe that the GMA
inhibits their abilities to manage or
develop their lands or to maximize their
profits. Over the past year, the
environmental community has worked
with builders, farmers and others who
are concerned about the GMA to find
ways to address their concerns while
maintaining the protections guaranteed
by the GMA. Several bills proposed by
this GMA working group have moved
successfully through the legislature.
Beach Driving Update
Audubon met again with Senator
Doumit and Representative Blake to
decide the next steps to address issues
with beach driving. With an intense and
quick session on the supplemental
budget, we did not get funding to do an
analysis. However, Senator Doumit is
very interested in working with
Audubon and members of the local
community to understand the issues
surrounding beach driving. Dean
Swickerath (Gray’s Harbor Audubon)
and Paul Malmberg (State Parks) will
work together on a timeline and
invitation to a series of meetings this
summer and fall. Stay tuned for the next
episode of “Our Birds and Beaches!”
 Audubon Washington’s
Birds Eye View Issue 4—March 5, 2004 Page 5 of 10

Ms. Carter Goes to
Washington DC
Federal funds for State Wildlife Grants
(SWG) are the “third leg” of the stool to
pay for wildlife habitat protection in our
state. We also get federal funding for
hunting and fishing, but the SWG funds
help pay for conservation work for the
“non-consumptive” wildlife and birds.
Federal funds are allocated to the states
based on population and the size of the
state. Washington's funding goes to the
Department of Fish and Wildlife for on-
the-ground projects (shrub steppe
habitat restoration for pygmy rabbits;
oak prairie habitat restoration for
Western Gray squirrels, etc.) and a
statewide conservation plan. Every
year, a coalition of wildlife conservation
organizations (Teaming for Wildlife)
hosts a lobby day in DC and this year
they helped pay for our travels to
Washington DC.
Last week, Nina Carter met with our
Congressional delegation about
increasing federal funds for State
Wildlife grants. President Bush’s
budget has $80 million for SWG, which
only means $1.4 million for our state.
Whereas, Audubon and the Teaming
With Wildlife Coalition would like to
see $100 million appropriated; this
would mean $2.3 million for
Washington State. With the current
worries about deficit spending, defense
spending and social security we are not
sure if we will get our request. The
decision will be made by October. We'll
keep you informed.
While she was there, Nina also talked
with our delegation about funding for
the Seward Park and Leavenworth
Audubon Nature Centers. Twelve state
legislators, including Representatives
Pettigrew, Santos, Armstong,
Condotta and Senators Parlette,
Kline, Horn and Prentice, signed
letters to each member of our
congressional delegation requesting
federal funding to renovate the Seward
Park and Leavenworth buildings.
Congressman McDermott and Hastings
were very interested in our projects as
were Senators Murray and Cantwell.
Again, the federal decision will be made
by October. In the meantime, we will
schedule trips for members of Congress
and their staff to our Nature Centers so
they can see first hand how important
these facilities are to local communities,
families and schools.

Budgets, Budgets Budgets…
Supplemental Budget for FY O5
Audubon has analyzed both Senate and House operating
and capital budgets. We’ve found discrepancies that should
be reconciled. If you are interested in any of the issues
below, please call your legislators to let them know your
position on these issues.
Operating Budget
Swan lead poisoning -- $65,000
House ESHB 2459 Sec. 306 (20)
Over the past 2 years, a coalition of scientists and
volunteers have analyzed why swans are dying in the Skagit
wetlands. The Audubon chapters, the Trumpeter Swan
Society, Canadian and US Fish and Wildlife Services and
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife have worked
together to gather data that now needs analysis. The House
budget includes $65,000 for WDFW to analyze their data
and participate in an international plan to identify and clean
up the primary “hotspots” poisoning swans. Audubon is
asking that the House budget proviso be retained and the
funds are “biennialized” (turned into a two year budget)
from last fiscal year.
Eco-Terrorism Database -- $50,000
Senate ESSB 6187 Sec. 222
The Senate has included $50,000 for the Washington
Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs to develop a
database and compile a “list of persons and organizations
involved in eco-terrorism activities.” This bad idea smacks
of McCarthyism, is unpatriotic and out-of-step with the
majority of Washingtonians who care about our
environment and quality of life. The question is; how many
of us would be on this Eco-Terrorism Database and how
would our civil rights be affected? Please call your
legislators and ask them to remove this proviso from the
final operating budget!
Spartina Control in Willapa Bay -- $85,000
 Audubon Washington’s
Birds Eye View Issue 4—March 5, 2004
House ESHB 2459 Sec. 308 (8)
Over the past two years, Audubon worked successfully with
Congressmen Dicks and Baird to secure federal funds to
eradicate spartina in Willapa Bay. State funds are needed
for FY05 for state agencies to continue this year’s control
project. Without these funds, the control efforts will be
delayed at the risk of proliferating spartina for another
growing season. Ask your legislators to retain the House
proviso to include funding for Spartina in Willapa Bay.
Wetland Banking Pilot Project -- $120,000
Senate ESSB 6187 Sec. 301 (13)
Two years ago, Ecology proposed a draft rule to manage
wetland banking. Audubon’s committee on wetlands,
Wetnet, analyzed the rule and recommended several
changes. At the last minute, however Ecology’s funding
was pulled from the rule-making process and all work
stopped. This week, the Senate included $120,000 to “test
run” the rule through a pilot rule project. Ecology would
select 3-4 wetland banking mitigation sites throughout the
state and see how well the draft rule worked to protect
habitat and function as a mitigation site. This would
precede rule adoption.
Over the past week, Audubon worked with Ecology and the
wetland banking organizations to amend the proposed
budget proviso. A citizen representative should be on the
oversight committee for the pilot project and they should be
reimbursed for travel expenses incurred through
participation in the wetland banking meetings. Audubon
and Wetnet have many policy questions that need to be
resolved (as we mentioned in our letter of two years ago),
but the best approach in this short budget cycle was to get a
seat at the table and some funds to reimburse our
volunteers. With help from Dee Arntz and Ann Aagaard,
all parties agreed to language that ensures participation and
reimbursement. Ask your legislators to support the
amendment to the wetlands banking proviso and include it
in the final budget.
Biodiversity -- $125,000
Senate ESSB 6187 Sec. 303 (5)
Audubon participated in a temporary Biodiversity
committee and is pleased to see funding in both the Senate
and House operating budgets for a biodiversity council, but
we prefer the House version in ESHB 2459 Sec. 303 (5)
Page 6 of 10
because it is straightforward and to the point. Audubon
urges including $125,000 in the final budget.
Environmental Education Partnership Fund --
$75,000
Senate ESSB 6187 Sec. 501 (2c) (x)
Last year the Legislature created the Environmental
Education Partnership fund. This year, the Senate budget
includes “start up” money to begin this grants program.
Funds will be used by schools and non-profits to pay for
such costs as school bus rentals, scientific equipment,
teacher training, and field trips to forests, wetlands or farms.
The grant program will create partnerships between schools
and local non-profit organizations to increase opportunities
for students to learn about science, math and critical
thinking in settings that help them retain knowledge and
become interested in science, forestry, farming or
environmental studies. Audubon requests that the Senate
proviso be included in the final budget.
DNR Campsites and Trail Maintenance --
$450,000
Senate ESSB 6187 Sec. 306(16)
Audubon requests $450,000 to maintain public facilities in
our state forests. Our chapter members use DNR’s 45
campsites and 17 trails every weekend for bird watching,
nature tours and general enjoyment of our state’s resources.
DNR’s maintenance budget was cut by 16% last year.
Without this measure, bathrooms will close, trash will not
be picked up and enforcement against vandals and other
criminal activity will be scarce and infrequent. Please
support higher funding for DNR.
Study the Spokane Aquifer -- $100,000
House ESHB 2459 Sec. 301 (11)
The Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie (SVRP) aquifer
provides drinking water for over 400,000 people. Recent
and projected growth has raised concerns about impacts on
water availability and water quality in the SVRP aquifer.
Funding is provided to match federal and Idaho State
funding to support the initial phase of a United States
Geological Survey study. This is a necessary expense and
should be retained in the final budget.
 Audubon Washington’s
Birds Eye View Issue 4—March 5, 2004
Support Tribal Water Right Mediation -
$400,000
House ESHB 2459 Sec. 301 (12)
The House budget includes funds for HB 2564, which
supports processes to address the water rights of the Lummi
Nation and the Tulalip Tribes. Clarifying tribal water rights
is a critical component to a manageable water code. The
environmental community supports this budget proviso.
Prevent Oil Spills –total of $200,000
House ESHB 2459 Sec. 301 (13) and (14)
The House supports funding for two bills designed to
prevent catastrophic oil spills. HB 3112 controls oils spills
at marine terminals by directing Ecology to work with
stakeholders and recommend how best to manage the
refueling of vessels by trucks on shore. Ecology is to
implement the recommendations if possible. HB 3020
would improve our oil spill management and prevention
program. We support the House funding to implement
both bills.
Address Electronic Waste --$65,000
House ESHB 2459 Sec. 301 (15)
Electronic waste grows exponentially as we consume and
discard new computers and other electronic appliances
every two to three years. This waste contains many harmful
chemicals, which require safeguards in their disposal or
reuse. The House funding supports ESHB 2488, which
would create a committee to evaluate electronic waste pilot
projects and to make recommendations for a statewide
system for collecting, recycling and reusing electronic
products. We support the house funding.
Capital Budget
Internal and External Partnership
Improvements $10,800,000
SHB 2573 Sec. 224
The House budget has included authorization for
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) to
spend existing, appropriated federal funds to improve
partnerships. The Senate does not include the increased
authorization for federal spending. At risk are several
habitat projects between willing sellers and the state. For
example, in Clallam County on the Dungeness River, a 300-
Page 7 of 10
acre parcel adjacent to the Dungeness River is ready to be
sold by a private landowner and state WWRP funds have
been approved for the project; without the federal spending
authority, this parcel may be lost. Audubon requests
WDFW be given the appropriate amount of federal
spending authority to acquire this parcel and others that
are already approved and have willing sellers.
Grazing Study -- $50,000
SHB 2573 Sec. 227
This proviso requires the Joint Legislative Audit and
Review Committee to assess the benefits and costs
associated with grazing leases or related agreements on state
lands managed by the Department of Natural Resources.
Audubon is very pleased to see this proviso because our
Conservation Committee members – especially from
Eastern Washington – have been concerned about the
impacts of grazing to public lands. We hope the Senate
and House will retain this proviso in the final budget.
Old Growth Inventory
SHB 2573 Sec. 905
The House Capital budget requires the Department of
Natural Resources to inventory older age classes of forests
that include old growth forests as defined by a panel of
scientists. The scientists are to include three scholars in
Pacific Northwest forest ecology. Other panel members
will include a representative from DNR and Fish and
Wildlife. Among other tasks, the panel will review the best
available science on forests to develop a definition of old
growth, include maps of older age classes of forests on state
lands and report to the legislature. For the duration of the
study, cutting or removal of trees or stands of trees 160
years or older shall be prohibited unless there is an
imminent safety hazard. Audubon strongly urges the House
and Senate to agree on this language and include it in the
final capital budget.
Forest Certification Feasibility
SHB 2573 Sec. 228
The Department of Natural Resources is instructed to report
to the Legislature and the Board of Natural Resources on 3rd
party forest certification for our state forestlands. The
report must answer the following questions:
• What changes to the current state forest management
practices need to be implemented for state-managed
 Audubon Washington’s
Birds Eye View Issue 4—March 5, 2004 Page 8 of 10

forests to achieve third-party sustainable forestry

certification under the standards of major sustainable
forestry certification organizations?
• What added changes in operational costs would be
associated with the changes in management practices
necessary to achieve certifications?
• Whether and how the preferred sustainable harvest level
alternative identified by the board of natural resources
would satisfy the state's responsibilities under any
applicable habitat conservation plans?
• How the preferred sustainable harvest level calculation
identified by the board of natural resources increases or
decreases the cost of compliance with the standards of
major sustainable forestry certification organizations?
We applaud the House Capital Budget chairman,
Representative Hans Dunshee, for including this proviso
in the House capital budget. His persistent hard work to
protect our state forests is very much appreciated.
Remember these
Audubon Activist Resources
Action Alerts & updates online at
http://wa.audubon.org
Legislature online: http://www.leg.wa.gov

Legislative Session At a Glance – An Activist Reference Guide

Many Audubon members are busy with careers, families and local volunteer work, yet want to influence their legislators. In our
growing efforts to facilitate relationships between Audubon members and their elected officials, we have pulled together the
following Primer. This should set you on your way to tracking and influencing the legislative issues your care about.

How many members represent my district?
Three—one senator & two representatives.
Who represents me? What district am I in?
Visit http://www.leg.wa.gov - click on “District Finder”
How do I find contact info for my legislators?
Go to http://www.leg.wa.gov and click on the
appropriate “House” or “Senate” menu items.
Which legislative issues are affecting birds,
wildlife and their habitat?
Audubon Washington’s legislative newsletter, Birds
Eye View, and our regular Action Alerts, answer this
question throughout session. Watch your email for
Action Alerts and visit http://wa.audubon.org for the
latest alert.
Where can I get bill information?
Visit http://www.leg.wa.gov click on “Bill Info.”
Enter the bill number and you’ll get a recent report on
the bill’s status and history.
For an up-to-the-minute update, contact Nina or Heath
at the state policy office.
What are the best ways to influence my
legislator on a specific legislative issue?
In descending order of effectiveness:
1. Generate dozens of individual phone calls, letters or
emails from voters in your district.
2. Meet with your legislator between sessions.
3. Make a personal visit to Olympia during session
4. Make a personal phone call
5. Write and send a personal letter/email/fax
6. Leave a message on the toll free legislative hotline:
1-800-562-6000
What should I include in correspondences to
my legislators?
Always include your name, address, bill title and number
and those of the official on all mail and E-mail
communications.
 Audubon Washington’s
Birds Eye View Issue 4—March 5, 2004 Page 9 of 10

Follow the 2004 Legislative Session

With Bird’s Eye View
You can follow all the action in the Bird’s Eye View newsletter. You will read about recent activities of the legislature and its
committees, learn the details of complex legislation, and track bills through the process. Also in the Bird’s Eye you’ll receive
action alerts so you can provide your input to key decision makers. You’ll find out what’s happening in Congress, keep track of
state and federal agencies actions, and learn about National Audubon Society’s national campaigns.

And all of this can be yours for the low, low price of $20.00 per year! We’ll even send it to you via email so that you can receive
this critical information even faster! To subscribe, complete this form and mail it with a check for $20.00 made payable to
National Audubon Society to:

Audubon Washington
P.O. Box 462
Olympia, WA 98507

Clip and send today!! Clip and send today!! Clip and send today!! Clip and send today!! Clip and send today!!

Subscription form for:

A Bird’s Eye View of the 2004 Legislative Session

Name_________________________________________________________________________

Address _________________________________________________________________________

City __________________________ Zip __________ County______________________

Phone (Day) ____________________ Phone (Eve.) ____________________

Would you like to receive the BEV by E-mail? YES! NO.

Would you like to receive Action Alerts by e-mail from Audubon Washington's Alert Network? YES! NO.

E-mail address: __________________________________________

Please enclose a check for $20.

Audubon Washington’s
Birds Eye View Issue 4—March 5, 2004 Page 10 of 10

Audubon Washington is a partnership of the Washington state office of the

National Audubon Society and Washington’s 25 independent Audubon Chapters.
Admiralty Audubon Lower Columbia Basin Audubon Seattle Audubon
Black Hills Audubon. North Cascades Audubon Skagit Audubon
Blue Mt. Audubon North Central Washington Audubon Spokane Audubon
Central Basin Audubon Olympic Peninsula Audubon Tahoma Audubon
East Lake Audubon Palouse Audubon Vancouver Audubon
Grays Harbor Audubon Pilchuck Audubon Vashon-Maury Isle Audubon
Kitsap Audubon Rainier Audubon Whidbey Audubon
Kittitas Audubon San Juan Islands Audubon Willapa Hills Audubon
Yakima Valley Audubon
Audubon Washington Policy Staff:
Nina Carter Heath Packard PO Box 462
Policy Director Field Director Olympia, WA 98507
(360) 789-0792 (360) 790-5680
ncarter@audubon.org hpackard@audubon.org

6
PO Box 462 Non-profit Org.
Olympia, WA 98507 US Postage
(360) 786-8020 PAID
Olympia, WA
Permit # 86
Mission of the National Audubon Society

To conserve and restore natural ecosystems, focusing

on birds, other wildlife,
and their habitats for the benefit of
humanity and the earth’s biological diversity.